Talk:Albus Potter
New infobox pic Hey :) I tried to do a new infobox pic for Albus with the promo shoot for HPCC. What do you think? Should we keep it or come back to the one from the film? This is the pic: File:Albus Potter (HPCC).png Lady Junky 22:35, May 31, 2016 (UTC) :As is the latest information from the timeline, and that most of what we will know about Albus Severus will come from this material, I think it's best to use this or another new picture from the play as they become available. --Ironyak1 (talk) 15:22, June 1, 2016 (UTC) ::Then on the other side, Albus Potter is about half the age, a whole decade of the stage actor, who I believe is about twenty one? I realize a different medium might require actors who can shoulder such roles on a stage, yet it does not change the fact that Albus is no more than 11 19 years after the Battle of Hogwarts, being born 2006 and beginning school in 2017, which I believe is the timeline in which the play take place. Alas, I think the image should reflect Albus's character as realistically as possible, no matter how he will be portrayed in the play. Therefore, we should go back to the Arthur Bowen or at least the kid depicted on the 'Albus Potter by himself' image'. Unless, of course, the image of him in that (what is it, a nest?) even can be counted legit, contradicting the actual cast of the very same character. Ninclow (talk) 13:43, June 2, 2016 (UTC) :::There are other cases where the age of the actor does not match the age of the character. The acters of the Marauders, Severus and Lily were I think between 50 and 60, considerably older than their roles when they played them and Shirley Henderson was 37 when she played Myrtle, who died at age 14. I think we should set up a vote on each individual character.--Rodolphus (talk) 14:05, June 2, 2016 (UTC) ::::Basing the age of the character on the actor's age is not a good idea. Actors are commonly older than the character they're playing and the movie editors use some fancy techniques to make them look the right age in post-production. ::::Additionally, please use proper indentations on talkpage discussions using colons at the front of your message. It's messy when indentations are not properly used. --''Saju '' 14:21, June 2, 2016 (UTC) :::::I think we should keep every picture as the ones from the film. If the character did not appear, only then we should use a picture from somewhere else such as how we updated Newt's picture to one with Eddie playing him because it was his first appearance. To avoid the confusion of why some characters have their picture changed to one from The Cursed Child and others not, it could simply be explained as we only put pictures up from their very first appearance. I also think it's best to forget about the age of an actor compared to the age of the character before it gets too complicated. --EmilyMills22 (talk) 14:22, June 2, 2016 (UTC) As we're starting to have the same discussion on a couple pages, and we have some good suggestions for possible solutions, I would recommend we move the discussion here: Forum:Character_Images_and_Infoboxes. Feel free to copy over your ideas there. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 14:58, June 2, 2016 (UTC) : why don't we use tabs for the picture on the infobox. Have one picture from the film, and the other from the play. Not only for Albus, but for every character in the play that did not debut in it.Long Island Spartan (talk) 17:07, June 7, 2016 (UTC) ::This is an very interesting idea! I made a mock-up here I could not get the tabs to display in the infobox so I had to place it immediately above. This takes some setup with a page for each image (unless someone can get tabview to display File: directly), but seems do-able. Please take a look and post feedback here! --Ironyak1 (talk) 17:54, June 7, 2016 (UTC) ::: That is such an amazing idea. I think what you have made in the mock up looks perfect. Then we can show everyone what they look like in the film and in the play, then keep the infoboxes strictly Tier 1 canon and it kind of explains why we put sources conflict, if we go with that idea. I think the mock up also solves our biggest problem of trying to decide whose picture we should use. We wouldn't have to vote for each character individually anymore. We can just use both! Good work! :) -- User:EmilyMills22 18:07, June 7, 2016 (UTC) ::::Yeah - I'm kinda taken with the idea too so I just posted it over in the forum as a general solution for our predicament. Sorry for the double locations for discussion! --Ironyak1 (talk) 18:12, June 7, 2016 (UTC) Loyalty Recently, there has been a back and forth adding certain loyalties to the infobox. I agree that we should remove it. How, exactly, can you be loyal to a family that doesn't exist anymore? Especially, the Pewerells died out centuries ago. And there is no information if his great-grandparents were still alive, so I'd tend that we should remove those two. --Rodolphus (talk) 10:41, August 9, 2016 (UTC) If you remove it from Albus' page, you need to do it for all of them. We need to keep it consistent. --Ashbell138 (talk) 10:46, August 9, 2016 (UTC) Rollback? Page needs to be rolledback to undo vandalism by this user. Zane T 69 (talk) 02:35, August 26, 2016 (UTC) :A couple small undo's and all is good --Ironyak1 (talk) 02:40, August 26, 2016 (UTC) :I thought rollback rights were required, even if the edits were in different sections? Zane T 69 (talk) 02:55, August 26, 2016 (UTC) ::Anyone can undo - just look at the History or diff of the page and choose undo for each of the edits. Rollback makes it easier (and more "silent") to accomplish the same goal. --Ironyak1 (talk) 03:10, August 26, 2016 (UTC) ::Okay. By the way, I saw a forum page earlier it had the category Wizengamot on it, instead of "The Wizengamot. The category listing titles such as Chief Warlock, Court Scribe and such. Anyway, the page I mentioned is, here. Zane T 69 (talk) 03:23, August 26, 2016 (UTC) Signature spell? It's a matter of opinion. Albus Severus's page says that Harry's signature spell is the disarming spell. I think his signature spell is an opinion thing. Like I think his signature spell is the Patronus charm for various reasons. The main reason being he mastared the charm at age 13 (before then an unheard of feat). Like I said though, I think Harry's signature spell is just a matter of oppinion. IcyAda1229 (talk) 18:41, October 26, 2016 (UTC) :That comes straight from canon. In Deathly Hallows, Harry is recognised by Death Eaters during the Battle of the Seven Potters by his use of Expelliarmus on Stan Shunpike. Lupin later (on the following chapter, if memory serves) tells him the Death Eaters consider this to be his "signature move". :The Patronus Charm hasn't got much use in duelling anyway. -- [[User:Seth Cooper| Seth Cooper ]][[User talk:Seth Cooper| owl post!]] 18:58, October 26, 2016 (UTC) In the infobox, shouldn't we add "Gryffindor (alternate timeline)" as well as just "Slytherin"? :Why? ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 00:39, December 28, 2016 (UTC) Category? Should we create a Weasley family descendants category, like the House of Black one? Albus Potter is not a member of the Weasley family, his mother is. He's a descendant, not a Weasley himself I would say. It's the same situation as Arthur Weasley, who is the son of a Black, but in the House of Black descendants category.--Rodolphus (talk) 12:10, September 30, 2017 (UTC) : Done and applied to Ginny & Harry's three kids - Category:Weasley family descendants. The deeper question is whether it should apply to the Granger-Weasley kids or are they Weasley family as they bear the Weasely name, or a new Granger-Weasley family but Weasley and Granger descendants? Oh the tangled webs we weave... ;) --Ironyak1 (talk) 00:02, October 4, 2017 (UTC) March 23rd Birthday - Source? What is the source for his birthday being 23rd March? --CosmicBreakfast (talk) 23:56, December 30, 2018 (UTC)CosmicBreakfast :As it was already reverted by Ironyak, I did it again. [[User:Harry granger| Harry granger ]][[User talk:Harry granger| ' Talk ']] 00:44, December 31, 2018 (UTC)